From: Burak Keceli <burak@buraks•blog>
To: "David A. Harding" <dave@dtrt•org>
Cc: Bitcoin Protocol Discussion <bitcoin-dev@lists•linuxfoundation.org>
Subject: Re: [bitcoin-dev] Ark: An Alternative Privacy-preserving Second Layer Solution
Date: Wed, 7 Jun 2023 16:30:07 +0300 (TRT) [thread overview]
Message-ID: <345972294.3114897.1686144607871@eu1.myprofessionalmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <c78b9e621e994f3cf3500e4480b61b0e@dtrt.org>
> A problem with the idea of using one-show signatures as double-spend
> protection is that miner-claimable fidelity bonds don't work as well
> against adversaries that are not just counterparties but also miners
> themselves.
Hey David,
The fidelity bonds in the Ark context are nothing but the vTXOs themselves, which in simple terms, have two possible closures: (1) a key-path collaborative closure with higher precedence and (2) a script-path closure with lower precedence.
The key-path closure is a 2-of-2 between the rightful owner of the vTXO and the service provider. The script path closure, on the other hand, lets the service provider sweep funds after a relative lock time. The key-path closure has higher precedence over the script-path closure since it can be triggered immediately with a satisfying signature.
If the service provider double-spends a transaction that enforces a one-time signature where Bob is the vendor, Bob can forge the service provider’s signature from the 2-of-2 and can immediately claim his previously-spent vTXO(s). If Alice (or the service provider) is a miner she won’t be able steal funds regardless, since she won’t be able co-sign from the Bob’s key.
Best,
Burak
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-06-07 13:30 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-05-22 7:54 Burak Keceli
2023-05-22 13:03 ` ZmnSCPxj
2023-05-23 4:31 ` Burak Keceli
2023-05-23 22:06 ` G. Andrew Stone
2023-05-24 0:40 ` ZmnSCPxj
2023-05-24 0:45 ` ZmnSCPxj
2023-05-24 7:53 ` Burak Keceli
2023-05-24 6:28 ` Burak Keceli
2023-05-24 20:20 ` adiabat
2023-05-24 23:02 ` David A. Harding
2023-05-26 11:56 ` Burak Keceli
2023-05-27 20:36 ` David A. Harding
2023-06-07 13:30 ` Burak Keceli [this message]
2023-08-06 22:43 ` Antoine Riard
2023-05-25 12:12 Ali Sherief
2023-05-26 7:33 jk_14
2023-05-28 6:02 Ali Sherief
2023-06-07 18:20 David A. Harding
2023-06-11 9:19 moonsettler
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=345972294.3114897.1686144607871@eu1.myprofessionalmail.com \
--to=burak@buraks$(echo .)blog \
--cc=bitcoin-dev@lists$(echo .)linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=dave@dtrt$(echo .)org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox